MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1518453201 · doi:10.47925/2010.384

Character Education and Citizenship Education: A Case of Cancerous Relationship

2010· article· en· W1518453201 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophy of education · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicValues and Moral Education
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian StudiesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharacter (mathematics)Character educationCitizenshipReading (process)Focus (optics)SociologyPoint (geometry)Moral characterMoral educationEpistemologyCitizenship educationPedagogyLawPolitical sciencePoliticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION A good share of what passes today for moral education bears the label of “character education.” On my reading of the literature pertaining to this area of education most (perhaps all?) of the theory and practice claiming this label is highly conservative in about every way possible. Not to put too fine a point on it, I consider most of it to be conceptually, empirically, morally, politically, and educationally corrupt. Now, obviously I cannot support this entire somewhat grandiose claim in 4,500 words. But it is not hard to find a lot of it strongly supported by others. However, one particular concern has been largely overlooked — the assumed relationship between character education and citizenship education. That particular concern comprises the focus of this essay.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it